Bombay High Court
Maharashtra State Road Development ... vs Union Of India And 3 Ors. And Zoru Darayus ... on 20 September, 2019
Author: Bharati Dangre
Bench: Pradeep Nandrajog, Bharati Dangre
(15)-NMW-190-19.doc.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.190 OF 2019
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.535 OF 2019
Mr. Zoru Darayus Bhathena ..Applicant
IN THE MATTER OF
Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation ..Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ..Respondents
Ms. Gayatri Singh, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Ronita Bhattacharya, Ms.
Kruti Venkatesh, Advocate for the Applicant.
Dr. Milind Sathe, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Ashutosh Kulkarni, Mr. J.
P. Kapadia, Mr. Shrey Shah, Mr. Sanidhya Arora, Mr. Gaurav Shah
I/by Little & Co., Advocates for the Petitioner.
Mr. Rui Rodrigues a/w Mr. N. R. Prajapati, Advocate for Respondent
No.1 - UOI.
Ms. P. H. Kantharia, Govt. Pleader for Respondent Nos.2 to 4.
Ms. Sharmila Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.3.
CORAM : PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, C.J. &
SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
DATE : 20 th SEPTEMBER, 2019 P.C. 1] Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it emerges that when MoEF granted necessary permission under CRZ-2011, the BGP. 1 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 20/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2019 03:23:06 ::: (15)-NMW-190-19.doc.
specific condition, being 8(i) was that in mangrove area road on stilt shall be constructed. There would be permanent loss of about 150 sq.mtrs. mangroves and 50 sq.mtrs. temporary loss, requiring five times the number of mangroves destroyed to be replanted. It is crystal clear that the condition permits destruction of mangrove only in 150 + 50 equal to 200 sq.mtrs. area and no more. The same Ministry, while according approval under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, granted in-principle approval to fell 1585 trees by treating 2.9907 hectare of forest land to be diverted for a road.
2] Suffice it to state pillars on 150 sq.mtrs. of forest land would not mean that 2.9907 hectare of forest land would be diverted. The diversion would be conceptual and not factual for the reason the area of the road passing through the forest i.e. length segment multiplied by the width segment would be 2.9907 hectare. Since the road would be an elevated road, the impact on the ground would be where pillars would be constructed, which as per the first Notification equals 150 sq.mtrs. of land. 50 sq.mtrs. would being impacted while constructing pillars.
3] Learned counsel for the Union of India would explain the apparent haitus between the two permissions by the same Ministry:
one under CRZ-2011 and the other under the Forest Conservation Act.
4] Till the next date of hearing trees other than felling trees
BGP. 2 of 3
::: Uploaded on - 20/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2019 03:23:06 :::
(15)-NMW-190-19.doc.
in the 150 sq.mtrs. land + 50 sqm.trs. land in respect whereof permission was accorded under the CRZ-2011 no more trees shall be felled.
5] List the Notice of Motion after four weeks.
SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J CHIEF JUSTICE
BGP. 3 of 3
::: Uploaded on - 20/09/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2019 03:23:06 :::